I have come up with a theory here that explains how the moral (personal value judgment) version of good and bad is fake and does not make us and our lives good or bad. That there is a scientific version of good and bad that humanity and science is unaware of.

It is our incentive that makes things and people of good value and worth to us in the first place. If we have no incentive to live for anyone or anything, then it would not bother us at all if those things and people were to be taken away from us. You just wouldn't care. Therefore, I just don't see how something can be of good value and worth to you without having any incentive to live for it.

Since our pleasant emotions (our reward system) is the only incentive an animal (in this case, a human being) has based upon what Robert Sapolsky has said who is a highly intelligent and famous evolutionary biologist, then it is only our pleasant emotions that can make things and people of good value and worth to us in our lives. You can search up Robert Sapolsky on http://www.youtube.com and watch his videos.

Our thoughts alone without our pleasant emotions due to depression and/or anhedonia (absence of pleasure) cannot give our lives any good meaning since they are all nothing more than the "thinking" experience of our brains. They can only experience different thoughts, send pleasure/displeasure signals, and send signals to make us move and express certain tones, acts, and expressions. But that is it. They cannot experience any incentives (urges) to live on and pursue our goals and dreams.

Just as how a blind and deaf person cannot give his/herself sight and hearing through his/her thoughts alone, we cannot give our lives any incentive either through our thoughts alone as long as we struggle with depression and/or anhedonia. Good and bad are senses like sight, hearing, and smell. They are scientific terms like sight, hearing, and smell. Our pleasant feelings/emotions are a sense of good meaning in our lives while our unpleasant feelings/emotions are a sense of bad meaning in our lives.

Our thoughts alone can only experience the words and phrases love, joy, happiness, suffering, despair, fear, rage, incentive, etc. But they cannot actually experience those things since those are scientific terms that have been defined through science as only being our pleasant and unpleasant feelings/emotions and not our thoughts.

Our pleasant feelings/emotions are the scientific version of good and our unpleasant feelings/emotions are the scientific version of bad. To lament and become frustrated/enraged over losses in your life without your incentive would be your brain fooling itself into thinking it had the incentive to live for those said things and people when it never had it to begin with. You would be fooling your brain into thinking your life is good and worth living despite your depression and/or anhedonia when it was never true.

I myself struggle with depression and a chronic 24/7 absence of all my pleasant emotions. This personal experience is what has led me to this theory. If my theory is wrong, then please prove it wrong. Otherwise, people would just be believing in the moral version of good and bad like a religion.

In conclusion, morality and the thinking area of our brains alone would not give our lives any good or bad meaning. It would only be a matter of choices and decisions. It would only be a matter of avoiding or pursuing certain situations and nothing more. We wouldn't even refer to the acts of Hitler as being bad. We would still say that Hitler's life was good since he derived pleasant emotions from harming the Jews. Morality does not exist. It would no longer have the terms good and bad for it. It is all just a matter of how we as human beings socialize and interact and nothing more. Our pleasant and unpleasant feelings/emotions are a feeling/emotional version of good and bad and not any moral version of good and bad.

(18-08-2015 06:21 PM)Kaepora Gaebora Wrote: First off, read your warning, didn't read it all because you lack the ability to summarize. Seriously, include a good summary.

Second, depression is more than a lack of meaning. You can't ascribe depression to one thing for all people.

If you want a more brief summary, then I will give it to you here in the form of a reply to your post you just gave to me. You say that depression is a lack of meaning. That it gives bad meaning to our lives and that it has nothing to do with our way of thinking. Well, there you go, depression would be the scientific version of bad. It is a sense of bad meaning in our lives. The opposite that would make our lives good would be our pleasant emotions which are the scientific version of good.

We have the senses sight and hearing and that if a blind and deaf person were to think to his/herself that he/she still has sight and hearing, then that would not give him/her sight or hearing. So in that same sense, as long as we struggle with depression, then thoughts of good meaning in our lives will not give our lives any good meaning since we do not have our actual sense of good meaning which would be our pleasant emotions (our reward system).

(18-08-2015 06:31 PM)Detective L Ryuzaki Wrote: If you want a more brief summary, then I will give it to you here in the form of a reply to your post you just gave to me. You say that depression is a lack of meaning. That it gives bad meaning to our lives and that it has nothing to do with our way of thinking. Well, there you go, depression would be the scientific version of bad. It is a sense of bad meaning in our lives. The opposite that would make our lives good would be our pleasant emotions which are the scientific version of good.

We have the senses sight and hearing and that if a blind and deaf person were to think to his/herself that he/she still has sight and hearing, then that would not give him/her sight or hearing. So in that same sense, as long as we struggle with depression, then thoughts of good meaning in our lives will not give our lives any good meaning since we do not have our actual sense of good meaning which would be our pleasant emotions (our reward system).

As someone who actually suffers from clinical depression:

Stop talking.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it." - A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner

(18-08-2015 06:31 PM)Detective L Ryuzaki Wrote: If you want a more brief summary, then I will give it to you here in the form of a reply to your post you just gave to me. You say that depression is a lack of meaning. That it gives bad meaning to our lives and that it has nothing to do with our way of thinking. Well, there you go, depression would be the scientific version of bad. It is a sense of bad meaning in our lives. The opposite that would make our lives good would be our pleasant emotions which are the scientific version of good.

We have the senses sight and hearing and that if a blind and deaf person were to think to his/herself that he/she still has sight and hearing, then that would not give him/her sight or hearing. So in that same sense, as long as we struggle with depression, then thoughts of good meaning in our lives will not give our lives any good meaning since we do not have our actual sense of good meaning which would be our pleasant emotions (our reward system).

As someone who actually suffers from clinical depression:

Stop talking.

Then it would be no different than if a religious person came up to me and said:

The fact is, if this scientific version of good and bad really does exist, then people need to hear this truth regardless of how offensive it is.

This has nothing to do with your post being the painful truth. It is everything to do with your post being offensive ignorance. Poorly written offensive ignorance, at that. If you honestly have written a whole book about this nonsense, then I hope for your readers' sake that you hire the single most talented editor in the world. And keep him supplied with Jack Daniels. He'll need it.

Beyond that, the actual idea that you're trying to convey is painfully simplistic. It is literally just the Good Feels Good trope taken to its (il)logical extreme: everything that feels good is good and everything that feels bad is bad, and also this means that there is a universal code of morality wherein pleasure is the only principle.

It is painfully simple. It is also pathetically simplistic, and completely ignores issues like, yes, depression, and sociopathy, so on. Even if it didn't, it would still be completely nonsensical, because it makes a completely unwarranted leap from "some things feel good" to "these things are literally universally good, because SCIENCE".

And yes, I am angry, because again, I suffer from clinical depression. I have, in fact, struggled with suicidal ideation literally every day of my goddamned life for more than five fucking years. Seeing someone like you turning depression into a caricature, a punch line for your nonsense, infuriates me.

So, I say again: Stop. Talking.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it." - A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner

The fact is, if this scientific version of good and bad really does exist, then people need to hear this truth regardless of how offensive it is.

This has nothing to do with your post being the painful truth. It is everything to do with your post being offensive ignorance. Poorly written offensive ignorance, at that. If you honestly have written a whole book about this nonsense, then I hope for your readers' sake that you hire the single most talented editor in the world. And keep him supplied with Jack Daniels. He'll need it.

Beyond that, the actual idea that you're trying to convey is painfully simplistic. It is literally just the Good Feels Good trope taken to its (il)logical extreme: everything that feels good is good and everything that feels bad is bad, and also this means that there is a universal code of morality wherein pleasure is the only principle.

It is painfully simple. It is also pathetically simplistic, and completely ignores issues like, yes, depression, and sociopathy, so on. Even if it didn't, it would still be completely nonsensical, because it makes a completely unwarranted leap from "some things feel good" to "these things are literally universally good, because SCIENCE".

And yes, I am angry, because again, I suffer from clinical depression. I have, in fact, struggled with suicidal ideation literally every day of my goddamned life for more than five fucking years. Seeing someone like you turning depression into a caricature, a punch line for your nonsense, infuriates me.

So, I say again: Stop. Talking.

I myself struggle with depression including a chronic 24/7 absence of all my pleasant emotions. So I am not someone ignorant of the suffering of others. As a matter of fact, my personal experience of having this depression and anhedonia has led me to this whole theory.

But do you have actual disproof of my theory? In other words, do you have actual proof that the moral version of good and bad really does make us and our lives good and bad and that there is no scientific version of good and bad? That someone who struggles with depression such as myself can still have good meaning in my life even while struggling with this depression and anhedonia (absence of pleasure)?

(18-08-2015 06:21 PM)Kaepora Gaebora Wrote: ... depression is more than a lack of meaning ...

... You say that depression is a lack of meaning ...

I've seen all I need to see of this guy. Have fun, folks!!

I hope that the world turns, and things get better. But what I hope most of all is that you understand what I mean when I tell you that, even though I do not know you, and even though I may never meet you, laugh with you, cry with you, or kiss you, I love you. With all my heart, I love you. - V for Vendetta